Aquilina Roman-Cordova v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
AQUILINA ROMAN-CORDOVA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-72048
Agency No. A077-282-030
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 16, 2013**
Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Aquilina Roman-Cordova, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for asylum and
withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
FILED
APR 22 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

11-72048 2
for substantial evidence factual findings, Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056
(9th Cir. 2009), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding that Roman-Cordova failed to
establish she suffered past persecution on account of any protected ground. See Li
v. Ashcroft, 356 F.3d 1153, 1158 (9th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (persecution is an
“extreme concept marked by the infliction of suffering or harm”) (internal
quotations omitted). Accordingly, she is not entitled to a presumption of a well-
founded future fear. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1). Substantial evidence supports
the IJ’s finding that, whether she is indigenous or Mestizo, Roman-Cordova has
not demonstrated that there is a pattern or practice of persecution against such
groups in Peru, or that she has a well-founded future fear of persecution under a
disfavored group analysis. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1060-61, 1064. Accordingly,
Roman-Cordova’s asylum claim fails.
Because Roman-Cordova failed to meet the lower burden of proof for
asylum, it follows that she has not met the higher standard for withholding of
removal. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).
To the extent Roman-Cordova is seeking relief under the Convention
Against Torture, we lack jurisdiction to consider her claim because she failed to

-- 2 of 3 --

11-72048 3
raise it to the agency below. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.
2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 3 of 3 --